Skip to main content

Celebrating National Customer Service Week (Part 2)

It’s National Customer Service Week (NCSW). Held every year during the first week in October, NCSW provides an excellent opportunity to explore ways to better serve your customers. A great starting point is ensuring your policies, processes and procedures are customer friendly.

What does that mean? Be a customer for a moment. What are the things that drive you crazy? Here is my list of pet peeves, along with a few suggestions.

Limited options – Every process begins with a trigger. For IT organizations, a common trigger is a call to the Service Desk to report an incident or submit a service request. Times have changed. Increasingly customers want the ability to use other channels such as email, self-help via the internet, chat, and in many cases, all of the above. There are currently four generations in the work place, all who have very different expectations and desires in terms of how they obtain support. Are your processes keeping up with the times? Surveys, focus groups and needs assessments are all effective ways to ensure you understand your customers’ current requirements.

Inflexible policies – One of the fastest ways to frustrate me is to use the phrase “That’s not our policy.” Don’t get me wrong. I understand that companies can’t be all things to all people and so need policies. What I would like to hear are my options. How about this: “what I can do according to our policy is…” Such an approach requires that you design flexible policies and empower (that means train) your staff. If there’s no room for flexibility (e.g., there’s a security or financial concern), make that clear up front and never, ever bend.

Inconsistency – I admit it, I’m human. If someone says “I shouldn’t do this, but I will to help you out,” I rarely say no. Having said that, I get very frustrated when a week later someone else, handling the same situation, refuses to bend the rules. Again, if there’s no room for flexibility in a policy, make that clear to your customers up front, and enforce compliance on the part of the your staff. If it’s okay to "bend the rules," change the policy and allow your staff to offer options; or change your process and add in the alternative procedures.

Lack of accountability – Any variation of “it’s not my job,” “what do you want me to do about it,” or “there’s nothing I can do” drives me crazy. What it tells me is that the organization has failed to design clear accountability into its processes. There’s always something you can do, even if that something is directing the customer to someone else for help. Ensure your processes have clear escalation procedures, including what people should do when they don’t know what to do. Also, push decision making to the level closest to the customer whenever possible, and train your staff on how to make those decisions.

Lack of communication – Thankfully, most organizations now understand they can’t just say “we expect service to be restored as soon as possible,” or any other variation on the theme, “go away, we’re working on it.” Clear escalation procedures tied to priority are critical, along with procedures for both customer and management notification. Technologies such as the e-mail, the web, and – dare I say it – Twitter, lend themselves nicely to periodic updates made within pre-defined time frames. Even when the status hasn’t changed, active communication eases customer frustration.

So ask yourself this, are your processes customer friendly? Better still, ask your customers!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is the difference between Process Owner, Process Manager and Process Practitioner?

I was recently asked to clarify the roles of the Process Owner, Process Manager and Process Practitioner and wanted to share this with you.

Roles and Responsibilities:
Process Owner – this individual is “Accountable” for the process. They are the goto person and represent this process across the entire organization. They will ensure that the process is clearly defined, designed and documented. They will ensure that the process has a set of Policies for governance.Example: The process owner for Incident management will ensure that all of the activities to Identify, Record, Categorize, Investigate, … all the way to closing the incident are defined and documented with clearly defined roles, responsibilities, handoffs, and deliverables. An example of a policy in could be… “All Incidents must be logged”. Policies are rules that govern the process. Process Owner ensures that all Process activities, (what to do), Procedures (details on how to perform the activity) and the policies (r…

How Does ITIL Help in the Management of the SDLC?

I was recently asked how ITIL helps in the management of the SDLC (Software Development Lifecycle).  Simply put... SDLC is a Lifecycle approach to produce the software or the "product".  ITIL is a Lifecycle approach that focuses on the "service".
I’ll start by reviewing both SDLC and ITIL Lifecycles and then summarize:
SDLC  -  The intent of an SDLC process is to help produce a product that is cost-efficient, effective and of high quality. Once an application is created, the SDLC maps the proper deployment of the software into the live environment. The SDLC methodology usually contains the following stages: Analysis (requirements and design), construction, testing, release and maintenance.  The focus here is on the Software.  Most organizations will use an Agile or Waterfall approach to implement the software through the Software Development Lifecycle.
ITIL  -  is a best practice for IT service management (ITSM) that focuses on aligning IT services with the needs …

Incidents when a Defect is Involved

Question: We currently track defects in a separate system than our ticket management system. With that said, my question is does anyone have suggestions and/or best practices on how to handle incidents when a defect is involved? Should the incident be closed since the defect is being worked on in another defect tracking system if it is noted in the incident ticket? I am considering creating an incident statuses of 'closed-unresolved' so the incident can still be reported on in our ticket management system but know it is being worked on/tracked in the defect system. With defects, it is possible that we may never work on them because they are very low priority and the impact is low to the user. However, in some cases a defect is being worked on. Should we create a problem ticket instead?
Thanks, René W.

Answer: RenĂ©. In ITIL, the activity you are describing is handled by the Problem Management process. ITIL does not use the term “defect” but it does use the term “known error” to…